I no longer want to hear the "Lakers got lucky" whines again.

[Jard]

I might not have a big shiny avatar and signature and might not have a lot of posts.

but I hope this doesn't go unnoticed.


SMH @ ALL YOU MARC GASOL HATERS

dude is a younger, stronger, lot more unpolished version of pau, best beware sleepers.

critt was nice too, but don't know if he'll grow to his potential especially with their roster.

still, the trade was onesided, but not as bad as the haters want it to be.


ps.

If shaq is healthy, which I think he will be considering he's motivated by a special Bean (you bet), he will have 1000 X the impact ben wallace and pavlovic have.

Still needs double teams, which is not really possible with lebron and some shooters on the floor if they space it right.

For the 20 minutes he's going to play (money time), you bet he'll still be Shaq' and you bet they also get another player that can lead a team which the coach clearly can't.
That trade was a brutal robbery, they could've gotten SO much more.

so here goes number two:

SMH @ Stern



edit:

If nike can afford it, I want to see that Shaq puppet asap!

[dragonkillerg]

Originally Posted by Jard

If nike can afford it, I want to see that Shaq puppet asap!

he's not sponsored by nike.

[Chronz]

Originally Posted by revgen

And Pau Gasol was a franchise player? He couldn't even win a playoff game until he became a 2nd banana.

Ok lets play this game, RJ couldnt make the playoffs in the East as a first option and that was in his absolute prime, Shaq couldnt make the playoffs with a better supporting cast than Pau had when he was carrying Memphis to the playoffs.

Shaq was good enough to be an all-star last season. He was also good enough to score 18 ppg on 61fg% and grab 8 boards. He can still draw double-teams. Not exactly something to sneeze at, especially when Ilgauskas is only giving Cleveland 12ppg on 47% shooting last season. They didn't even have to give up Ilagauskas to get him.

Neither teams had to give up much, whats the point in mentioning that? And yea he had a good year, but hes not going to give Cleveland that, hes on a decline and has nowhere near the value Pau has because ..., again hes in his PRIME and will be the best PF the Lakers have ever had. The difference is that Shaq and RJ were bargains meant to solidify an already contending team, Pau is the kind of player that TRANSFORMED the Lakers into a Championship winning team and plans on providing the Lakers with several years of service, Shaq will likely be a 1 time stay, and definitely only at his best for 1 year.

RJ isn't even close to being worth 3 over-the-hill roleplayers. Even you know that.

Where did I say he was? Even you should know not to put words into my mouth


PS Heres what puffyusa posted at CL

Lakers= Championship contender for years to come
Cavs= One year run

Our team made a great under the radar move for a young bonified #2 option. The Cav's were handed Shaq after the Suns tried to hand them Shaq before and Clev balked at the idea. They took something they fealt they didn't need in the first place.

[MrRJ]

Originally Posted by event_staff_9

hahaha, didn't want to put unnecessary fuel into the discussion



he was a former all-star, and rookie of the year so people knew who he was

People in Denver had no idea(personal experience)... and I don't think anyone had any idea of the impact he would have with the lakers, back2back finals and a championship...Just what kobe needed...

Well that's a lie, when I found out I was hopping off my seat,

same way when billups was traded to Denver

[revgen]

Originally Posted by Chronz

Ok lets play this game, RJ couldnt make the playoffs in the East as a first option and that was in his absolute prime, Shaq couldnt make the playoffs with a better supporting cast than Pau had when he was carrying Memphis to the playoffs.

Which is my point. Neither Pau, Shaq, or RJ are franchise players right now. But they are certainly great bargains for what they had to give up.

Originally Posted by Chronz

Neither teams had to give up much, whats the point in mentioning that?

The whole point is that all teams got lucky in the trade deals. Giving up less for way more.

Originally Posted by Chronz

And yea he had a good year, but hes not going to give Cleveland that

He can still draw double-teams even this late in his career. "that" is all-star impact, especially in the east where the bigs aren't as good except for Dwight. Now of course Cleveland needs to make sure it has role players that will knock down the shots when the doubles happen.

Originally Posted by Chronz

hes on a decline and has nowhere near the value Pau has because ..., again hes in his PRIME and will be the best PF the Lakers have ever had. The difference is that Shaq and RJ were bargains meant to solidify an already contending team, Pau is the kind of player that TRANSFORMED the Lakers into a Championship winning team and plans on providing the Lakers with several years of service, Shaq will likely be a 1 time stay, and definitely only at his best for 1 year.

That depends upon what you call "value". Either way, all teams get way more than what they gave up. Shaq gives them an all-star this season that they didn't have last season. If he can draw double-teams in the west even though he's facing way better big men, he can certainly draw doubles in the east. If it doesn't work out, then Cleveland can dump him and sign a FA in 2010. If Pau didn't work out for the Lakers, like Shaq didn't work out in Phoenix, the Lakers would have been stuck with his contract.

Originally Posted by Chronz

Where did I say he was? Even you should know not to put words into my mouth

You said "RJ is clearly a franchise caliber player" in your first post. Sarcastically implying that Pau was a franchise player and therefore a huge step above whatever San Antonio got. Pau may be a better player than RJ, but he isn't a franchise player.

Originally Posted by Chronz

PS Heres what puffyusa posted at CL

Lakers= Championship contender for years to come
Cavs= One year run

Our team made a great under the radar move for a young bonified #2 option. The Cav's were handed Shaq after the Suns tried to hand them Shaq before and Clev balked at the idea. They took something they fealt they didn't need in the first place.

Puff is one of the posters on CL I rarely agree with.

The Cavs can dump shaq in 2010 if it doesn't work out. They can go after FA and resign Lebron with Shaq's 21 million, Big Z's 11.5 million, and Varajo's 6.2 million off the books. That's 39 million bucks shaved off the payroll for the Cavs to go shopping. For Puff to say that Cleveland has only a "1 year run" is ridiculous under these circumstances. He completely ignores the 2010 FA market.

[detrimental]

Originally Posted by revgen

Next time anybody complains about Memphis giving away Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown, I'm going to mention these trades.

Shaq to Cleveland for a over-the-hill Ben Wallace and Sasha Pavlovic.
Richard Jefferson to San Antonio for old Bruce Bowen, old Kurt Thomas, and old Oberto.

The Lakers "got lucky" complaints are no longer warranted.

Yeah, those trades are totally comparable. Contracts are extremely similar too.

Please Revgen, STFU.

[fedec51]

Let me simplify the thing rev, the Lakers got lucky on that trade, how lucky? A lot because giving Brown and Crittenton for Gasol is simply a gift. These teams got lucky too, how lucky? I dont know, but I'd consider as lucky as the Lakers' trade if the Cavs woulda gotten Amare instead of Shaq.

The Lakers got lucky on the trade but that was two seasons ago, they are the champions now because they are the best team, sure that trade made a huge bust for the team but that's not enough, at some point you have to grow as a team and be ready to be better than everybody else.

[revgen]

Originally Posted by fedec51

Let me simplify the thing rev, the Lakers got lucky on that trade, how lucky? A lot because giving Brown and Crittenton for Gasol is simply a gift. These teams got lucky too, how lucky? I dont know, but I'd consider as lucky as the Lakers' trade if the Cavs woulda gotten Amare instead of Shaq.

The Lakers got lucky on the trade but that was two seasons ago, they are the champions now because they are the best team, sure that trade made a huge bust for the team but that's not enough, at some point you have to grow as a team and be ready to be better than everybody else.

Besides Kwame and Critt, the Grizz also got Marc Gasol, who's done a solid job at C, averaging 11ppg and 7reb. Certainly better than Kwame Brown would have done for them.Sure he's nothing like his brother, but for a rookie contract, he's not a bad value. Lopsided trade? Yes. Gift? No. Grizzlies did get a solid starting center.

You actually think the Cavs would have been Lucky if they got Amare instead of Shaq?

IMO, Amare has been a disappointment. He's a no-defense, scoring PF, who wants to shoot 3-pointers. No wonder Golden State wants him. Shaq, on the other hand, draws doubles in the paint. If the Suns thought Amare was all that, they wouldn't have went after Shaq. Is Amare supposed to stop Dwight or guard Rashard Lewis? I don't think so.

[Imagodd99]

Boston bought KG and Allen. And ****ty Super Lakers bought the whole 1998 or 1999 starting western all star team. It comes down to how much a GM is willing to pay. Personally if I was GM I think I'd be willing to shell out luxury tax for some bonafide all stars that will rejuvenate a team. If you want to blame anyone blame the Memphis GM for the dumb ass trade.

And by the way, even broken knee Amare > Shaq. I know no one will agree but I think he's probably as good as Dwight. At least as good as Finals Dwight. I bet if they had Amare instead of Dwight they would have faired a lot better.

[detrimental]

Originally Posted by revgen

Besides Kwame and Critt, the Grizz also got Marc Gasol, who's done a solid job at C, averaging 11ppg and 7reb. Certainly better than Kwame Brown would have done for them.Sure he's nothing like his brother, but for a rookie contract, he's not a bad value. Lopsided trade? Yes. Gift? No. Grizzlies did get a solid starting center.

You actually think the Cavs would have been Lucky if they got Amare instead of Shaq?

IMO, Amare has been a disappointment. He's a no-defense, scoring PF, who wants to shoot 3-pointers. No wonder Golden State wants him. Shaq, on the other hand, draws doubles in the paint. If the Suns thought Amare was all that, they wouldn't have went after Shaq. Is Amare supposed to stop Dwight or guard Rashard Lewis? I don't think so.

You're reaching, seriously. You're usually smart, but if you think the Lakers didn't get lucky... well. One word sums that up. Fail.